doe they or can they merit ex condigno eternall life or glorie I say merit ex condigno because I willingly graunt with the auntient writers and holie fathers that good workes in a godly sense may be said to merit that is to say to impetrate fauour and reward at Gods hands for his mercie and promise sake who hath promised not to leaue vnrewarded so much as one cup of cold water giuen in his name but they can neuer truly be said to merite for any worthinesse or condigne desert of the works that are done Against which last part I contend with the papists at this present and namely against the late decree of the late Romish Counsell of Trent whose expresse wordes are these Si quis dixerit hominis iustificati bona opera ita esse dona Dei vt non sint etiam bona ipsius iustificati merita aut ipsum iustificatum bonis operibus quae ab eo per Dei gratiam Iesu Christi meritum cuius membrum viuum est fiunt non verè mereri augmentum gratiae vitam aeternam ipsius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratia decesserit consecutionem atque etiam gloriae augmentum anathema sit If any shall say that the good workes of the iustified man are so the gifts of God that they be not also the good merites of him that is iustified or that the iustified man by his good workes which he doth by the grace of God and merit of Christ Iesus whose liuely member he is doth not truly merit the increase of grace eternall life and the consequution of the same eternall life if he shal depart hence in grace and also the augment of glory let him be accursed Here we see the flat doctrine of the Romish Church which whosoeuer will not beleeue stedfastly must bee damned euerlastingly and with fire and faggot bee sent packing speedily Yet that this doctrine is most absurd in it selfe most blaphemous against the free mercie of God and most iniurious to the inestimable merits of our Lord Iesus I vndertake by Gods assistance to prooue by such cleere and euident demonstrations as shal be able to satisfie all indifferent readers and to put the papists to silence for euer in this behalfe The first reason drawne from the holy Scriptures THe first place of holy scripture is conteined in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the gift of God is life euerlasting in Christ Iesus our Lord. This text of scripture doth plainely conuince that life eternall cannot be condignely atchieued by the workes of man for being the free gift of God it can no way be due to the merite of mans worke The Rhemists to extenuate the cleerenesse of this text and as it were to hide and conceale the euidencie thereof doe translate for the Gift of God the Grace of God following their old vulgar Latin edition VVhich translation though in this place it mae be admitted yet doth it not sufficiently expresse the efficacie of the originall word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a gift freely bestowed for which respect their owne famous linguist Arias Montanus who was the onely man chosen as most sufficient for the translation of the old testament out of the Hebrew and of the new out of Greeke and imployed by the king of Spaine for that onlie end did not translate gratia but donatio not grace but donation or free gift Now let vs see and view the iudgement of the holy fathers vpon this portion of holy writ Saint Theodoret hath these wordes Hic non dicit mercedem sed gratiam est enim Dei donum vita aeterna si quis enim summam absolutam iustitiam praestiterit temporalibus laboribus aeterna in aequilibrio non respondent He saith no there reward but grace for eternal life is the gift of God For although one could performe the highest and absolute iustice yet eternall ioyes being weighed with temporall labours are nothing answerable Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Non eundem seruat oppositorum ordinem Non enim dicit merces benefactorum vestrorum vita aeterna sed donum Dei vita aeterna vt ostenderet quod non proprijs viribus liberati sint neque debitum aut merces aut laborum sit retributio sed omnia illa ex diuino munere gratuitò acceperint He doth not obserue the same order of opposites For he saith not eternall life is the reward of your good workes but eternall life is the gift of God that he might shew that they are not deliuered by their owne strength or vertues and that it is not a debt or a wages or a retribution of labours but that they haue receiued all those things freely of the gift of God Origen writeth thus vpon the same wordes Deum verò non erat dignum militibus suis stipendia quasi debitum alique dare sed donum gratiam quae est vita aeterna in Christo Iesu domino nostro But it was not a thing worthy beseeming God to giue stipends to his souldiers as a due debt or wage but to bestow on them a gift or free grace which is eternall life in Christ Iesus our Lord. Saint Ambrose hath these wordes Sicut enim sequentes peccatum acquirunt mortem ita sequentes gratium Dei id est fidem Christi quae donat peccata babebunt vitam aeternam For as they that follow sinne gaine death so they that follow the grace of Christ that is the faith of Christ which forgiueth sinnes shall haue eternall life Theophilact hath these wordes Gratiam autem non mercedem dixit à Deo futurum perinde ac si inquiat non enim laborum accipitis premia sed per gratiam fiunt haec omnia in Christo Iesu qui haec operatur factitat He said grace not wages was to come from God as if he should say for ye receiue not rewards of labours but all these things are done by grace in Christ Iesus who worketh and doth them Anselmus and Photius haue the same wordes in effect which I omit in regard of breuitie By these manifold testimonies of the holy fathers the doctrine which I defend is cleere and euident viz. that eternall life is the free gift of God and is not merited or purchased by desert of man that eternall life is not a due debt a deserued wages or retribution of mans labours but proceedeth wholy and solie of the free mercy and grace of God that mans workes waighed in the ballance with the ioyes of heauen are nothing at all answerable vnto them To which fathers I will add the verdict of Paulus Burgensis a verie famous popish Spanish Bishop These are his wordes Noluit ergo dicere stipendium iustitiae vita aeterna sed maluit dicere gratia Dei vita aeterna quia eadem merita quibus redditur non a nobis sunt sed in nobis à Deo facta sunt
which all papists doe and must appeale in this weighty and most important question For example sake if thou wouldest wish me to lend thee my cloake to defend thee from a showre of raine and promise to giue me an hundred pounds for the loane then doubtlesse were it true to say that after such loane an hundreth pounds were due vnto me yet withall would it be most true also that such loane of my cloake were not the condigne merit of that hundreth pounds but that it proceeded principally of the free gift and promise made vnto me farre aboue my merit and desert neither could my act be any way rightly tearmed the condigne merit of that reward And yet it is euident that thus standeth the state of the question betweene the condigne merit of mans workes and the excellencie of the ioyes of heauen For I willingly graunt that eternall life is due to the workes of Gods elect and that it is as well the crowne of iustice as of mercie but withall I constantly affirme that God bestoweth it on his elect freely for his owne name sake and not for any merit worthinesse or condignitie of their workes For this cause their owne deere frier Ioannes de Combis teacheth this golden lesson Meritum condigni dicit aequalitatem meriti ad remunerationem dico autem aequalitatem non arithmeticam sed geometrieam id est non quantitatis sed proportionis Et hoc patet quia Deus semper remunerat supra meritum sicut punit citra condignum Condigne merit doth connotat the equalitie of merit to the thing that is merited I say equalitie not arithmeticall but geometricall that is not of quantitie but of proportion And this is euident because God euer rewardeth aboue our merits as he punisheth lesse than we deserue Out of these wordes we see two things cleered the one that we deserue greater punishment for our sinnes than God inflicteth vpon vs for the same the other that for our well doing we receiue greater reward than our workes doe or can deserue And consequently that wee doe not condignely merit eternall life For this cause saith their famous popish doctour Nicolaus de Lyra in this maner Salus enim aeterna excedit totaliter facultatem naturae humanae Propter quod non potest eam attingere nisi ex largitate diuinae misericordiae For eternall life doth farre surmount and wholly exceed the facultie and power of mans nature VVherefore man can no way attaine vnto it but onely by the liberalitie of Gods mercy For this cause saith another popish doctor Dionysius Carthusianuns in this maner Ex gratia seu per gratiam Dei datur iustis pro praemio vita aeterna Non hoc dicitur merita excludendo sed vt insinuctur quod principaliter ascribendum sit gratia Dei qui etiam premiat vltra condignum Eternall life is giuen for reward to the iust of grace or through the grace of God This is not said to exclude merits but to insinuate that reward must principally bee ascribed to the grace of God who rewardeth vs aboue our deserts Loe this great papist laboreth with maine and might to stablish popish condigne merit of workes who affirming more boldly than wisely that the elect doe merit eternall life telleth vs with one breath that the reward is aboue our merits and deserts And so vnwittingly and vnwillingly he confuteth himselfe and refelleth that doctrine which he gladly would confirme To conclude our Iesuit and renowned Cardinall frier Bellarmine who after mature deliberation and graue consultation had with all the best learned Iesuits in the world and with the Pope himselfe whose faith iudiciall cannot faile say they saith all that possibly can be said for the life of poperie doth with great grauitie and prudent sagacitie in the name of all papists deliuer this doctrine vnto vs Quod vero attinet ad rem ipsam Durandi sententia si nihil aliud vellet nisi merita nostra non esse ex condigno siue ex iustitia absolutè sed tantum ex hypothesi id est posita liberali Dei promissione non esset reprobanda sequitur respondeo absolutè non posse hominem á Deo aliquid exigere cum omnia sint ipsius tamen posita eius voluntate pacto quo non vult exigere à nobis opera nostra gratis sed mercedem reddere iuxta proportionem operum verè possumus ab eo mercedem exigere quomodo seruus non potest absolutè a domino suo vllum premium postulare cum omnia quae seruus acquirit domino suo acquirat tamen si domino placeat donare illi opera sua pro ijsdem tanquam sibi non debitis mercedem promittere iure mercedem pro suis operibus postulabit Touching the matter it selfe Durands opinion if he had no other meaning but that our merits are not absolutely iust and condigne but hypothetically in respect of Gods liberall promise were not to be reiected I answere that man cannot absolutely exact any thing of God seeing all things are Gods owne neuerthelesse his will and couenant being made that he will not exact our workes of vs freely but will reward them according to their proportion we may truly require hyer of him like as a bondman cannot absolutelie require any reward of his lord seeing euery thing which the bondman gaineth is gotten and gained to his master yet for all that if it shall please his master and lord to bestow his works on him and to promise reward for the same as if they were not due vnto him then may the bondseruant iustly demaund reward for his workes Thus saith the Iesuit Bellarmine and consequently this is all that all papists say or can say for the life of popish doctrine Out of whose wordes I note first that his brother Durands opinion hath put him to his best trumpe Secondly that Durands opinion as is already prooued is this viz. that the merit of workes in the best liuer vpon earth cannot truly and properly be called meritum ex condigno condigne merit but onely merit in way of acceptation and in respect of Gods free mercy and promise made vnto man without all deserts Thirdly that Bellarmine graunteth this opinion in this sense For hee saith plainely If Durand admit merit in respect of Gods promise his opinion cannot be reproued Fourthly that our Iesuit maketh good that doctrine which I here defend as which is the selfe same that Durand holdes And consequenly if Bellarmine and his popish fellowes and followers would stand constantly to their owne doctrine which they publish in printed bookes wee and they should soone agree and these great controuersies would haue an end Fourthly that man cannot absolutely exact any thing at Gods hands because all things are Gods owne Fiftly that in respect of Gods good pleasure and couenant frely made to man we may truely require reward of God Yea my selfe graunt that we
may not onely truly but also iustly require reward at Gods hands in regard of his promise freely made vnto vs. But I euer denie withall that any reward is due to our best workes for any condigne merit or desert of or in our workes Gods free acceptation mercie and promise set apart For as Saint Austen grauely saith Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the best liuer vpon earth if thou examine his life thy mercy set apart Answere ô papists if ye can and if ye cannot then repent and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you I prouoke you to the combat I adiure you all ioyntlie and euery one of you seuerally for the credite of your cause for the honour of your Pope and the life of popish doctrine which now lieth bleeding and wil shortly yeeld vp the Ghost if some soueraigne remedie bee not speedily prouided for the same The sixt Article Of the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ALthough it be true that all sinnes are not equall but one greater than another and although it be also true that in a good and godly sence some sinne may be tearmed mortall and some veniall which yet may more fitly be called sinnes regnant and not regnant neuerthelesse most true it is to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and onely veniall by way of Gods free acceptation and mercie for his owne name sake and merits of his deare sonne our Lord Iesus I prooue it first both briefely and euidently For Christ himselfe telleth vs in his holy Gospell that we must giue a straight account of euery idle word in the generall day of iudgement And for no other end doubtlesse must this account be made but onely because euery idle word is flatly against the law of God This the papists can neuer denie it is euident to euery child And yet must they likewise confesse that idle words be those sinnes which they call venials And consequently they must confesse against their wils and against their professed Romish doctrine that all sinnes are mortall that is to say against the law of God This doctrine of our Sauiour Christ Iesus is confirmed by the testimonie of S. Iohn his beloued Apostle where he telleth vs that euery sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the transgression of Gods law as is alreadie prooued at large in the fourth article of concupiscence And the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doth plainely confirme the same Secondly because our popish Rhemists confesse in plaine tearms that euery sinne is a swaruing from the law of God For doubtlesse that which swarueth from the law is truly said to be against the law but not agreeable to the law Thirdly because the famous popish Frier and Romish bishop Iosephus Angles teacheth the same doctrine in his booke dedicated to the Pope himselfe These are his own expresse words Omne peccatum veniale est alicuius legis transgressio Patet quia omne veniale est contra rectam rationem agere contra rectam rationeÌ„ est agere contra legem naturalem precipientem non esse à regula rectae rationis deuiandum Euery sinne veniall is the transgression of some law This is cleere because euery veniall sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth vs not to depart or swarue from the rule of right reason Loe euery veniall sinne is against right reason and against the law of nature which is giuen to euery one in his creation in his birth or natiuitie Fourthly because Durandus another famous papist confuteth the late receiued popish opinion of Thomas Aquinas which the Pope and his Iesuits hold to wit that veniall sinnes are preter legem non contra Besides the law but not against the law These are Duâ—ands owne words Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra legem dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the argument answere must be made that euery sinne is against the law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the popish vniuersities and schooles So saith Frier Ioseph these are his words D. Thomas eius sectatores tenent peccatum veniale non tam esse contra legem quam preter legem Sequitur Durandus tamen alij permulti hanc sententiam impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scbolis videtur communior S. Thomas and his followers hold that a veniall sinne is not so much against the law as besides the law But Durand and many others impugne this opinion auouching veniall sinnes to be against the commaundements And this opinion seemeth now adaies to be more common in the schooles Here I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adaies the mutabilitie of Romish religion For in that he saith modo now adaies he giueth vs to vnderstand that their doctrine is now otherwise than it was of old and in former ages A note worthie to be remembred For the old Romane religion was catholicke pure and sound and with it doe not I contend but I impugne late Romish faith and doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoole-men haue brought into the Church Fiftly because their canonized martyr Iohn Fisher the late bishop of Rochester teacheth the same doctrine so plainely as euery child must needs perceiue the truth in that behalfe These are his expresse words Quod peccatum veniale solum ex dei misericordia veniale sit in hoc tecum sentio That a veniall sinne is onely veniall through the mercie of God and not of it owne nature therein doe I agree vnto you Thus saith our bishop And as he telleth me that he agreeth with Luther therein so doe I tell our Iesuites that I agree with him with Durand Almaine and the other papists that teach the same doctrine Sixtly because Gerson another famous popish writer holdeth the same opinion These are his expresse words Nulla offensa dei est venialis de se nisi tantum modo per respectum ad diuinam misericordiam qui non vult de facto quamlibet offensam imputare ad mortem cum illud posset iustissimè Et ita concluditur quod peccatum mortale veniale in esse tali non distinguuntur intrinsecè essentialiter sed solum per respectum ad diuinam gratiam quae peccatum istud imputat ad poenam mortis aliud non No offence of God is veniall of it owne nature but onely in respect of Gods mercie who will not de facto imputa euery offence to death though he might doe it most iustly And
inutiles labores quemadmodum enim qui luce ista priuatisunt recta vtique non pergunt ita qui ad radios diuinarum Scripturarum non respiciunt multa coguntur continuò delinquere vtpote in longe peioribus tenebris ambulantes quod ne nobis vsu veniat occulos ad splendorem Apostolicorum verborum aperiamus If therefore you will read the scriptures with alacritie of mind you shall need no other helpe at all For Christs word is true when he saith Seeke and ye shall find knocke and it shall be opened vnto you But because many of you are charged with wiues children and domesticall regiment and so can not wholy addict your selues to this studie yet at the least bee readie to heare what others haue gathered and bestow so much diligence in hearing what is said as you doe in scraping worldlie goods together For albeit it bee a shame to require no more of you yet will I be content if ye doe so much For the cause of infinit euils is your ignorance in the scriptures From hence springeth the manifold mischiefe of heresies from hence dissolute life from hence vaine and vnprofitable labours For euen as they that are bereaued of this light cannot goe the right way so they that doe not behold the beames of the holy scriptures are enforced inconintently to offend in many things as walking in farre greater darknesse This is the golden censure of Saint Chrysostome rightly surnamed the golden mouthed doctour Out of whose doctrine I gather these worthy obseruations First that whosoeuer studieth the scriptures seriously and with alacritie shall find therein and vnderstand so much as is necessarie for his saluation And consequently that our disholy father the Pope debarreth vs of the ordinarie meanes of our saluation when he vpon paine of excommunication inhibiteth vs to read the scriptures in our vulgar tongue vnlesse we haue his licence and dispensation so to doe And he hath I confesse some reason thus to deale because forsooth poperie would haue a short reigne if euery papist might freely read the holy scripture and other godly bookes written for their instruction But alasse they are so bewitched with his blessings that they thinke they shal be damned if they doe but read this my discourse or any other opposite to poperie not hauing his licence so to doe But all his priests are licenced and so they can pretend no excuse if they doe not frame some answere hereunto Secondly that it is a very shame for men charged with wiues children and families that they doe but onlie heare sermons and doe not withall studie the holy scriptures and consequently that it is much more shame for others that be more free not to read them diligently and greatest shame of all for a bishop to approue or commend them that will not so doe Thirdly that heresies dissolute life and all other euils doe proceed of ignorance and of not reading the holy scriptures The same Saint Chysostome in an other place hath these wordes Propterea obsecro vt subinde huc veniatis diuinae scripturae lectionem diligenter auscultetis nec solum cum huc venitis sed domi diuina bâ—blia in manus sumite vtilitatem in illis positam magno studio suscipitc Sequitur Paulo inferius Tantum igitur lucrum oro ne per negligentiam amittemus sed domi vacemus diuinarum scriptur arum lectioni hic presentes non in nugis inutilibus colloquijs tempus decoquamus I beseech you therefore that you will come hither now and then and attend diligently the reading of the holy scriptures neither that onely when ye come hither but at home also take the holy bibles into your hands and with great studie embrace the profit contained in them I pray you therefore let vs not negligently loose so great gaine but when we are at home let vs then apply our selues to read the holy scriptures and being here let vs not spend our time idlely and vainely By these testimonies to omit many others we may perceiue most euidently how grieuously Saint Chrysostome lamenteth that the people in his time were so negligent in reading the holy scripture VVhat therefore would that holy father say if he liued in these our daies in which the Pope burneth such scriptures as the people vnderstand in their vulgar tongue In which he commaundeth all church-seruice to be in straunge and vnknowne language In which he excommunicateth all say-persons be they neuer so well learned that reason of matter of faith or dispute of his power VVhat would he say if he heard priests pronounce absolution in their popish sacrament of penance which neither the penitents nor the priests themselues doe often vnderstand Nay what would he say if he were this day in popish Churches where they doe not onely read their Churchseruice in Latine but also Latine homilies or sermons vnto the vulgar sort which yet they tearme an exposition of the scripture which maner of proceeding is practised euery festiuall day of nine lessons in the time of their mattens In fine what would he say if he knew the rude vulgar sort who are commaunded to heare the Gospell read in Latine and withall should see them listening with their eares least any word should not be heard though impossible of them to be vnderstood would he not and might he not iustly say with the holy Apostle that they were mad Yes doublesse it cannot be denied Origen who liued aboue a thousand and three hundred yeares agoe doth not onely exhort the people seriously to read the scriptures but withall sheweth plainely that in his time they were read in the vulgar tongue These are his words Certè si non omnia possumus saltem ea quae nunc docentur in ecclesia vel quae recitantur memoriae commendemus Doubtlesse if we cannot beare away all things contained in the scriptures yet at the least let vs remember those things which are taught and read in the Church Loe in these golden words he speaketh not onely of sermons but also of the Gospels Epistles Prayers Lessons and histories of the Bible For sermons are contained in the word docentur which are preached and the rest in the word recitantur which are read or rehearsed but certes if such things had beene read in a strange and vnknown tongue the vulgar sort could not haue committed them to memorie And consequently to no end or purpose should Origen haue made this exhortation And the obiection which is common in the mouthes of our papists That Saint Peter affirmeth the scriptures to be obscure and hard to bee vnderstood notwithstanding the great brags and insolent vaunts of our Rhemists is too too foolish and of no force at all For first Saint Peter saith not that the whole scripture is hard to be vnderstood but some things in S. Paules Epistles Secondly he speaketh not solely and barely of the vnlearned but of the vnlearned which are vnstable Thirdly
negligence or of ignorance corrupt the innocencie of the law of Nature which we all receiue in the Protoplast Adam S. Ambrose in another place iumpeth with Bede in these words Non discreuit concupiscentiam hanc à peccato sed miscuit hoc significans quia cum nec suspicio quidem esset istud non licerè apud deum cognoui inquit esse peccatum Sub sua persona quasi generalem agit causam Lexitaque concupiscentiam prohibet quae propterea quod oblectamento est non putabatur esse peccatum He hath not discerned this concupiscence from sinne but hath coupled it with sinne signifying thereby that when there was not so much as any suspition that this thing was not lawfull before God I knew saith he that it is sinne Vnder his own person he pleadeth as it were the generall cause The law therefore forbiddeth concupiscence which because it delighteth seemeth not to be sinne Thus writeth S. Ambrose whose words cannot possibly be vnderstood of any other concupiscence than of that which is inuoluntarie and originall Thirdly that their owne vulgar Latine text which the late councell of Trent preferreth before both the Hebrew and the Greeke and commandeth all papists to vse it as authenticall and none other hath the word iniquitas in both places and doth call as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ininiquitie these are the expresse words omnis iniquitas peccatum est All iniquitie is sinne Loe their owne translation to which all papists are tied as a Beare to a stake doth flatlie confound them all and saith plainelie and expressely That euerie iniquitie is a sinne And yet the papists of Rhemes bluntishly and impudently defend the contrarie crying out with open mouthes That some iniquitie is not sinne The truth is this that they are driuen to a non plus and cannot tell in the world what to say against this doctrine of concupiscence in the regenerate For both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truly and fitly tearmed iniquitas or iniquitie VVhich but that I studie to be briefe I could shew by a thousand testimonies out of S. Austen S. Ambrose and S. Bede Answere therefore ô papist if ye can or if ye dare not because ye cannot then reclaime your selues and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you and adiure you if your hearts faile you not and if your owne consciences condemne you not to send me an answere to this short challenge which I haue compiled very briefely so once to prouoke you to the open combat which I haue now many years expected at your hands and could neuer yet find so much courage in any of you all VVherefore to seale vp the veritie of this article as an vndoubted truth I will here adde for the complement as amost delicat post-past to satisfie the longing appetites of the Iesuit Parsons the arch priest Blackwell and all the traiterous crew of that Iesuited brotherhood the flat testimonie of their saint Thomas Aquinas whose doctrine they are bound to defend beleeue and approue and may not in any case refuse or denie the same these are his expresse words Dicendū quod illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationisnon perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potest esse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum ingenere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem perueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati VVe must answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefest in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some vnperfect thing in this kind VVhereupon it commeth that such a motion of sensualitie preuenting reason is a veniall sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne Thus writeth Aquinas out of whose words I note these important obseruations First that this Aquinas is a popish canonized saint Secondly that for his great learning he was surnamed Doctor Angelicus The Angelicall Doctor Thirdly that Pope Vrbanus the fourth and Pope Innocentius the fift did so admire and reuerence the excellent learning of this famous schoole-doctor who was a learned clarke indeed that they confirmed his doctrine for authenticall and gaue it the first place after the canonicall Scripture Fourthly that this great doctor so highly renowned in the Romish church that no papist may denie or gainesay that which he hath written graunteeth freely teacheth plainely and auoucheth constantly that the inordinate motion of sensualitie which goeth before reason is properly a sinne though but a veniall sinne as he tearmeth it For it is one thing to be a sinne perfectly another thing to be a sinne properly A veniall and little sinne is as well and as truly a sinne as a mortall and great sinne as the papists tearme them For he is as truly and properly a theefe that stealeth a lambe or a goose as he that stealeth an oxe or a horse though not a theefe in so high degree For mortall and veniall sinnes as the papists tearm them doe onely differ Secundum magis minus according to more and lesse But in truth euery sinne is mortall as I haue alreadie proued in my booke of Motiues Answer ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame The fift Article Of the condigne so supposed merite of workes THe papists either of ignorance or of malice doe most vnchristianlie slander the professors of Christs Gospell as though they were enemies to good workes when in deed they both thinke preach and write more Christianly more religiously and more sincerely than the papists doe of and concerning godlie actions and good workes In regard hereof before I come to the maine point of that which I purpose to oppugne in this article I graunt first of all that though good workes neither doe nor can goe before iustification yet they euer follow as the fruits follow the tree the persons that are freely iustified by Gods mercie in Christ Iesus for his merits and condigne deserts I graunt secondly that though good workes goe not before iustification yet doe they so necessarilie goe before saluation that no man without them can attaine eternall life when possibilitie is graunted to doe them I graunt thirdly that good workes are the true effects of predestination by which the children of God make their saluation sure vnto themselues and manifest vnto the world Yet this notwithstanding I hold constantlie beleeue stedfastly and affirme Christianlie that albeit good workes are the effects of predestination and necessarie fruits of faith and iustification yet neither are they the cause of predestination nor of iustification neither